didn't get to hear the Charlie Rose program because the sound on my computer is not working.I don't think we will be importing fuel in tankers from the moon ever.The only thing I know about Branson's alternative fuel is it is made from cellulosic ethanol derived from plant waste:http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-138819756.htmlThat is an environmentally friendly source, unlike corn and soy.

yes, the helium 3 isotope is predicted to be abundant on the moon.
The Chinese and Russians also want it, not to mention everyone else when they hear about it.
A basketball sized reactor yields a continuous millawatt of energy. See:

"Scientists estimate there are about1 million tons of helium 3 on the moon, enough to power the world for thousands of years.

The equivalent of a single space shuttle load or roughly 25 tonscould supply the entire United States' energy needs for a year, accordingto Apollo17 astronaut and FTI researcher Harrison Schmitt"

That's what Branson said.

From JD's source--

"Helium-3 is considered a safe, environmentally friendly fuel candidate for these generators, and while it is scarce on Earth it is plentiful on the moon.

As a result, scientists have begun to consider the practicality of mining lunar Helium-3 as a replacement for fossil fuels.

"After four-and-half-billion years, there should be large amounts of helium-3 on the moon," said Gerald Kulcinski, a professor who leads the Fusion Technology Institute at the University of Wisconsin at Madison."

"Scientists estimate there are about1 million tons of helium 3 on the moon, enough to power the world for thousands of years.

The equivalent of a single space shuttle load or roughly 25 tonscould supply the entire United States' energy needs for a year, accordingto Apollo17 astronaut and FTI researcher Harrison Schmitt"

That's what Branson said.

From JD's source--

"Helium-3 is considered a safe, environmentally friendly fuel candidate for these generators, and while it is scarce on Earth it is plentiful on the moon.

As a result, scientists have begun to consider the practicality of mining lunar Helium-3 as a replacement for fossil fuels.

"After four-and-half-billion years, there should be large amounts of helium-3 on the moon," said Gerald Kulcinski, a professor who leads the Fusion Technology Institute at the University of Wisconsin at Madison."

It's an interesting idea.

WGal

thanks to both nnsecu and JD for sources![/QUOTE]

An interesting idea, but a long way off, if it ever materializes. In the same link the skeptics say:

"Economically unfeasible

Indeed for now, the economics of extractingand transporting helium 3 from the moon are also problematic. Even if scientistssolved the physics of helium 3 fusion, "it would be economically unfeasible,"asserted Jim Benson, chairman of SpaceDev in Poway, California, which strivesto be one of the first commercial space-exploration companies. "UnlessI'm mistaken, you'd have to strip-mine large surfaces of the moon."

While it's true that to produce roughly70 tons of helium 3, for example, a million tons of lunar soil would needto be heated to 1,470 degrees Fahrenheit (800 degrees Celsius) to liberatethe gas, proponents say lunar strip mining is not the goal. "There's enoughin the Mare Tranquillitatis alone to last for several hundred years," Schmittsaid. The moon would be a stepping stone to other helium 3-rich sources,such as the atmospheres of Saturn and Uranus.

Benson agreed that finding fuel sourcesin space is the way to go. But for him, H2O and not helium 3 is the idealfuel source. His personal goal is to create gas stations in space by miningasteroids for water. The water can be electrolyzed into hydrogen or oxygenfuel or used straight as a propellant by superheating with solar arrays."Water is more practical and believable in the short run," he said.

But proponents believe only helium3 can pay its own way.

"Water just isn't that valuable," Schmittsaid. Besides the helium, a mining process would produce water and oxygenas by-products, he says. '